kodack announced another 10,000 layoffs

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>Kodak continues to take a beating.

After a while these press releases all start to sound alike, whether
it's Kodak or Agfa or Ilford or Polaroid or film camera makers. Every
one of them seems to include a quote like this ... "to counter a
faster-than-expected decline in consumer film sales", as if they are
baffled by events beyond their understanding.

You would think that if it happens five years in a row it wouldn't be
so "unexpected" anymore. It's not like the trend hasn't been clear for
some time now.

Bill

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Bill Hilton" <bhilton665@aol.com> wrote:

> > Kodak continues to take a beating.
>
> After a while these press releases all start to sound alike, whether it's
> Kodak or Agfa or Ilford or Polaroid or film camera makers. Every one of
> them seems to include a quote like this ... "to counter a
> faster-than-expected decline in consumer film sales", as if they are
> baffled by events beyond their understanding.
>
> You would think that if it happens five years in a row it wouldn't be so
> "unexpected" anymore. It's not like the trend hasn't been clear for some
> time now.
>
> Bill
>

The decline in film sales and hence film cameras has probably been
accelerated beyond the business predictions. Maybe they didn't take into
account the inexplicable behaviour of some staff at film processing labs.

In latter years in the UK there were several high profile cases where
innocent celebrities were reported by processing workers for taking child
abuse photographs. Photographs that eventually after somewhat protracted
police gravitas, turned out to be harmless family snaps. A naked son or
daughter in the bath, that sort of thing.

The celebrity cases were probably just the tip of the iceberg which surfaced
into the media spotlight. How many other cases involving innocent ordinary
family snapshotters went unnoticed? It's anybody's guess. Didn't these
snoopers realise their actions massively publicised one of the main
advantages of a new photographic technology? One which obviates the need for
their expensive services and therefore puts them straight out of a job?

Talk about turkeys voting for Christmas!

--
T Ritchie (Sr)

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Mark Roberts <mark@robertstech.com> wrote:

>burnsdavidj@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>>http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/050720/earns_eastman_kodak.html?.v=9
>
>Details in the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle:
>http://www.rochesterdandc.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050720/BUSINESS/50720001

And not that I'm even suggesting there's any truth to the "HP buying
Kodak" rumour, but today's drop in Kodak's stock price certainly means
HP now would have to spend much less to do so.


--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 19:21:38 -0400, Alan Wonsowski
<awonsow@atattglobal.network> wrote:

>Yes, it is true. Film sales in China were well below expectations. On
>a positive note, Kodak's Digital business grew by more than 40%. The
>company is in transition - moving away from a film based photographic
>company to a digital one.


The big difference for Kodak now in a Digital world is that they don't
have dominant market shares. Big market shares always mean better
profit margins. And Kodak has to share the market with very
lean-and-mean computer peripheral companies (printers) and consumer
electronics companies that have great brands (Sony).

I'm glad I don't own any Kodak stock.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Father Kodak wrote:

> The big difference for Kodak now in a Digital world is that they don't
> have dominant market shares.

You've hit the nail squarely on the head.

Digital imaging is a completely new technology--and companies like Sony,
Panasonic and HO--companies that would never have gotten even a toehold
in traditional film camera businesses--are dominant players in the
digital market.

If Kodak loses its reputation as a photo leader, how can that help it
retain digital market share? Kodal will be perceived as just another
also-ran.

I really am sorry for their predicament. Despite their recent
shortcomings, that company was singlehandedly responsible for bring
photography to the everyday person. We are, in a sense, indebted to
them. It is sad to watch them struggle in an industry that they
themselves created.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 17:39:19 GMT, Jeremy <jeremy@nospam.com> wrote:

>Father Kodak wrote:
>
>> The big difference for Kodak now in a Digital world is that they don't
>> have dominant market shares.
>
>You've hit the nail squarely on the head.
>
>Digital imaging is a completely new technology--and companies like Sony,
>Panasonic and HO--companies that would never have gotten even a toehold
>in traditional film camera businesses--are dominant players in the
>digital market.
>
>If Kodak loses its reputation as a photo leader, how can that help it
>retain digital market share? Kodal will be perceived as just another
>also-ran.
>
>I really am sorry for their predicament. Despite their recent
>shortcomings, that company was singlehandedly responsible for bring
>photography to the everyday person. We are, in a sense, indebted to
>them. It is sad to watch them struggle in an industry that they
>themselves created.


True enough, but this evolution is classic. Almost every time there
is a "disruptive" change, the current market leaders are too slow and
too late to react effectively. Digital photography is disruptive. So
was the shift away from mainframes, where IBM was absolutely dominant.
The shift to fuel-efficient cars after the 1970s oil embargoes gave
Japanese car companies an opening in the US market.

Remember daisywheel printers and Diablo Systems? No? Before laser
printers, daisywheels were the standard for high quality printing.
Etc., etc., etc.

It's tough for a company to know when to shift away from their current
products to the "new" technology. How do you know that the latest
innovation is really important and will become popular. How do you
manage to keep your existing sales going when it is obvious that you
are not going to improve them. How do you face reality and admit the
need for a change that will devalue a lot of the stuff that you have
worked many years to put into place.

Tough decisions.

Father Kodak